In this section discuss Albania [Shqipërisë], Bulgaria [България], Croatia, Macedonia [Македонија, Makedonija] and Russia [Федерация, Rossiyskaya] including any other place on the Eastern European continent.

like i said, the mafia hit their peak in the 50's because they got organized and started controlling the unions and all that lucrative stuff and vegas, etc...

but italian organized crime's peak was during prohibition. at no other time could al capone walk aroudn the city and claimed he owned it or go beat up the mayor in front of a cop. luciano as well was a figure symbolizing prohibition, even though luciano was slightly past prohibition.

Yeah, we know what you meant Johnny. And you are wrong. And you know it. This really is the the absolute LAMEST argument you've ever made.

THE ITALIANS ARE THE MAFIA AND THE MAFIA ARE THE ITALIANS.

The same organization cannot reach it's peak in two different time periods. And your reasoning about many Italians not being a part of the Mafia in the 1920's is stupid. Back then, they were still fighting amongst themsevles and with the Irish and Jewish groups. They really woudn't establish themselves as a national force until the 1930's and wouldn't reach their peak until the 1950's and 1960's. The Chicago Outfit in the 1950's and 1960's was even more powerful than than it was in Capone's day.

And notice that I keep saying the 1950's AND 1960's. But you just keep talking about the 1950's. If you knew anything about the Mafia, which you obviously don't, you would know it was just as powerful in the 1960's as it was in the 1950's. It wasn't until the 1970's when general attrition began to set in.

one; the italians did not all belong to the mafia you twit, you moronic fool. even today not all italian criminals in america belong to the mafia. but back in the 1920's, many of them did not because it was a strictly sicilian thing back then. hence; al capone.

thewestside wrote: The Chicago Outfit in the 1950's and 1960's was even more powerful than than it was in Capone's day.

yes you may, because the boss of the chicago outfit was not supplying all the beer to one area of the country in the 1950's. he didn't control widespread and rampant prostitution in the city. he didn't call himself the mayor of chicago and beat up the mayor for passing a bill he didn't agree with. thats why my aboriginal friend

yes you may, because the boss of the chicago outfit was not supplying all the beer to one area of the country in the 1950's. he didn't control widespread and rampant prostitution in the city. he didn't call himself the mayor of chicago and beat up the mayor for passing a bill he didn't agree with. thats why my aboriginal friend

And may I also ask why you believe that adds up to the Capone era Outfit surpassing the Outfit of Accardo?

CheGuevara wrote:one; the italians did not all belong to the mafia you twit, you moronic fool. even today not all italian criminals in america belong to the mafia. but back in the 1920's, many of them did not because it was a strictly sicilian thing back then. hence; al capone.

I already answered this in the other thead but will do so again. Not all the families were strictly Sicilian back then. Only some were, like Maranzano's organization. But once again, I've pointed out that fact that what infighting between the Sicilians, Neopolitans, and Calabrians there was was a weakness for them. Not a strength. They became the most powerful once they unified themselves into a single, cohesive, national organization. And that included Capone's group in Chicago.

yes you may, because the boss of the chicago outfit was not supplying all the beer to one area of the country in the 1950's. he didn't control widespread and rampant prostitution in the city.

The fact that Capone had Prohibition didn't make him more powerful. The Outfit under Accardo had just as much clout with the politicians, judges, and cops. They still controlled the prostitution throughout the city. As well as all the gambling, including taking over the numbers rackets in the black neighborhoods in the 1950's. They moved into Las Vegas and California. They had the labor unions and interests in a wide number of legitimate businesses, the likes of which Capone never had.

Hey Johnny boy, read this article on the Chicago Outfit - including what it says under the 1950's heading.

he didn't call himself the mayor of chicago and beat up the mayor for passing a bill he didn't agree with. thats why my aboriginal friend

Proof postive Johnny has no idea what he is talking about. Capone pushed or struck (depending on which account you go with) the Mayor of the town of Cicero - not Chicago. Now watch, Johnny will try and claim that he meant the Mayor of Cicero. LOL!

And on a side note, where do you get off calling anyone "aboriginal," you smelly, just-off-the-boat Albanian refugee.

Azure9920 wrote:And may I also ask why you believe that adds up to the Capone era Outfit surpassing the Outfit of Accardo?

While all that may be true, it doesn't necessarily mean much.

well to me, and this might just be me, but when a gangster does all the things he did without reprecussion in front of national news, he has to be pretty damn powerful. i, myself can't order around police chiefs and beat up the mayor of my city and claim i run the city in front of the news cameras. why? simply because i don't have that kind of power... yet :P

thewestside wrote:I already answered this in the other thead but will do so again. Not all the families were strictly Sicilian back then. Only some were, like Maranzano's organization. But once again, I've pointed out that fact that what infighting between the Sicilians, Neopolitans, and Calabrians there was was a weakness for them. Not a strength. They became the most powerful once they unified themselves into a single, cohesive, national organization. And that included Capone's group in Chicago.

you're an idiot. a real idiot. prohibition is what i'm claiming gave them their peak power. not infight amongst italian regions you fvcking fat american moron.

The fact that Capone had Prohibition didn't make him more powerful. The Outfit under Accardo had just as much clout with the politicians, judges, and cops. They still controlled the prostitution throughout the city. As well as all the gambling, including taking over the numbers rackets in the black neighborhoods in the 1950's. They moved into Las Vegas and California. They had the labor unions and interests in a wide number of legitimate businesses, the likes of which Capone never had.

capone didn't need it. he was well off enough with prohibition, prostitution and gambling. and when i say power, i don't just mean money alone dickheaded moron.

Proof postive Johnny has no idea what he is talking about. Capone pushed or struck (depending on which account you go with) the Mayor of the town of Cicero - not Chicago. Now watch, Johnny will try and claim that he meant the Mayor of Cicero. LOL!

ohhhhhhhh man! i mixed up chicago with cicero because i read about this fact three years ago. DAMNIT! how could i have done that? are you seriously this stupid you fvcking dick?

And on a side note, where do you get off calling anyone "aboriginal," you smelly, just-off-the-boat Albanian refugee.

he is an aboriginal for one. secondly, i didn't come on a boat thirdly, albanians have a cleaner hygience than the fat contraptions also known as americans. lastly, proud to be an albanian refugee if i was an american-italian like you, i would be 40 pounds heavier, have the gotti haircut going, walk around the mall with a headband and have a 20% chance of not knowing where america is on the map lol!

CheGuevara wrote:well to me, and this might just be me, but when a gangster does all the things he did without reprecussion in front of national news, he has to be pretty damn powerful. i, myself can't order around police chiefs and beat up the mayor of my city and claim i run the city in front of the news cameras. why? simply because i don't have that kind of power... yet :P

Clearly Capone had some measure of power, that's undeniable. However, you're ducking the original question.

Azure9920 wrote:Clearly Capone had some measure of power, that's undeniable. However, you're ducking the original question.

no i'm not. i just explained. power is not only measured in money. capone has force and money. accardo could not do what capone did with such a cocky approach. and i seriously doubt accardo had as many police and politicians in his pocket as capone did. there is no way the guy even came close.

CheGuevara wrote:well to me, and this might just be me, but when a gangster does all the things he did without reprecussion in front of national news, he has to be pretty damn powerful. i, myself can't order around police chiefs and beat up the mayor of my city and claim i run the city in front of the news cameras. why? simply because i don't have that kind of power... yet :P

Look how ridiculous Johnny's reasoning is for why he thinks Capone was more powerful. It's all meaningless stuff. And like I pointed out in the other thread, it was the mayor of Cicero Capone assaulted, not Chicago. This should show everyone that Johnny has no idea what he's talking about. Just talking out of his ass as usual.

And just for the record, if you knew ANYTHING about the Chicago Outfit, you would know just how corrupt the city continued to be well after Prohibition. The Outfit still had mayors, aldermen, judges, cops, etc. in their pocket. The new bosses simply weren't as public about it as Capone. But leave it to a 17 year old kid to think that "image" is the total sign of power. One minute he's saying the Albanians are so powerful because they are low key. But here, he is claiming that Capone was so powerful because he was so public about what he did. Just one more contradictive arguments.

CheGuevara wrote:you're an idiot. a real idiot. prohibition is what i'm claiming gave them their peak power. not infight amongst italian regions you fvcking fat american moron.

Yeah, and I'm telling you - you subhuman Albanian piece of shit - that despite Prohibition, the Italians were not at the peak of their power in the 1920's because they were still fighting amongst themselves in addition to fighting with Irish and Jewish groups.

capone didn't need it. he was well off enough with prohibition, prostitution and gambling. and when i say power, i don't just mean money alone dickheaded moron.

I'm talking about money and power. Two sides of the same coin in many instances. The Outfit under Accardo was more entrenched, more sophisticated, more expansive, more diverse, more rich, and more powerful than it was under Capone.

ohhhhhhhh man! i mixed up chicago with cicero because i read about this fact three years ago. DAMNIT! how could i have done that? are you seriously this stupid you fvcking dick?

Like I said in the other thread, if you are going to use Capone assaulting the mayor as the whole basis for your reasoning that he was more powerful, at least know what mayor he assualted. You didn't because you don't know what you're talking about.

CheGuevara wrote:no i'm not. i just explained. power is not only measured in money. capone has force and money. accardo could not do what capone did with such a cocky approach. and i seriously doubt accardo had as many police and politicians in his pocket as capone did. there is no way the guy even came close.

Yeah, you are dodging the quesiton. And there you go again with "I doubt" - as in you have no idea. You are simply going on your own assumptions. You know nothing about Accardo or the other bosses than succeeded Capone. And you only know about Capone for the same reasons everyone else knows about him. I could throw a rock and hit somebody on the street that has as much general knowledge about the mob as you do. You are an ametuer.

Azure9920 wrote:Clearly Capone had some measure of power, that's undeniable. However, you're ducking the original question.

no i'm not. i just explained. power is not only measured in money. capone has force and money. accardo could not do what capone did with such a cocky approach. and i seriously doubt accardo had as many police and politicians in his pocket as capone did. there is no way the guy even came close.

Well then, that seals the deal, now doesn't it?

Obviously Sam Giancana and John Gotti where close runners up as the most power bosses of all time, right?

thewestside wrote:Look how ridiculous Johnny's reasoning is for why he thinks Capone was more powerful. It's all meaningless stuff. And like I pointed out in the other thread, it was the mayor of Cicero Capone assaulted, not Chicago. This should show everyone that Johnny has no idea what he's talking about. Just talking out of his ass as usual.

yes dumbass, i messed up the name chicago from cicero because i read about this incident 2-3 years ago. this PROVES that i have no idea what i'm talking about. i don't know if you actually take a second to read your posts or if you just type and then read when it's posted.

And just for the record, if you knew ANYTHING about the Chicago Outfit, you would know just how corrupt the city continued to be well after Prohibition. The Outfit still had mayors, aldermen, judges, cops, etc. in their pocket. The new bosses simply weren't as public about it as Capone. But leave it to a 17 year old kid to think that "image" is the total sign of power. One minute he's saying the Albanians are so powerful because they are low key. But here, he is claiming that Capone was so powerful because he was so public about what he did. Just one more contradictive arguments.

my argument is not that capone was powerful because he was public. my argument is that capone did what he damn well pleased without the slighest remorse about anybody in the city. he bitch slapped the cicero mayor in front of a cop. he controlled entireeeeeee police departments, had a spy network that would make the kgb look like basketball players (exhagerration, just incase your dumbass will actually take that seriously) and had over one thousand employees.

thewestside wrote:Yeah, and I'm telling you - you subhuman Albanian piece of shit - that despite Prohibition, the Italians were not at the peak of their power in the 1920's because they were still fighting amongst themselves in addition to fighting with Irish and Jewish groups.

whatever you say you fat, lonely fvck. if this makes you happy, believe it. to me, it will never be true.

I'm talking about money and power. Two sides of the same coin in many instances. The Outfit under Accardo was more entrenched, more sophisticated, more expansive, more diverse, more rich, and more powerful than it was under Capone.

if this makes you happy. believe it. it doesn't make it true.

Like I said in the other thread, if you are going to use Capone assaulting the mayor as the whole basis for your reasoning that he was more powerful, at least know what mayor he assualted. You didn't because you don't know what you're talking about.

how this even makes sense is BEYOND me. you're officially the dumbest 30+ year old i have ever seen or dealt with in my life.

thewestside wrote:Yeah, you are dodging the quesiton. And there you go again with "I doubt" - as in you have no idea. You are simply going on your own assumptions. You know nothing about Accardo or the other bosses than succeeded Capone. And you only know about Capone for the same reasons everyone else knows about him. I could throw a rock and hit somebody on the street that has as much general knowledge about the mob as you do. You are an ametuer.

you fvcking idiot. capone was my introduction to the mob dickhead. i know everything there is to know about him. MUCH MORE than you'll ever know about the guy.

Azure9920 wrote:Well then, that seals the deal, now doesn't it?

Obviously Sam Giancana and John Gotti where close runners up as the most power bosses of all time, right?

dude, if you think you're right. that automatically makes you right in your own head. continue to be a wannabe pseudo-smart ass if you want. go ahead, copy and paste my first statement and respond with a, "oh the irony."

CheGuevara wrote:dude, if you think you're right. that automatically makes you right in your own head. continue to be a wannabe pseudo-smart ass if you want. go ahead, copy and paste my first statement and respond with a, "oh the irony."

What's with the hostility bro? I was in agreement with you.

Even to a casual bystander who knows nothing of the mafia or its workings, it's painfully obvious John Gotti was one of the most successful NY bosses of all time, I mean, look at all that press he got!

CheGuevara wrote:yes dumbass, i messed up the name chicago from cicero because i read about this incident 2-3 years ago. this PROVES that i have no idea what i'm talking about. i don't know if you actually take a second to read your posts or if you just type and then read when it's posted.

I'll say it one more time. If you are going to use the incident of Capone smacking the mayor as the basis for your argument of how powerful he was, at least know what mayor he assaulted. But as usual, the facts escape you.

my argument is not that capone was powerful because he was public. my argument is that capone did what he damn well pleased without the slighest remorse about anybody in the city.

Yeah, and that's ultimately why he ended up in Alcatraz. The same reason why Gotti ended up at Marion. Their publicity proved to be their undoing.

he bitch slapped the cicero mayor in front of a cop.

Doesn't mean as much as you think it means. But obviously this is the kind of incident you would base your whole argument on.

he controlled entireeeeeee police departments,

So did his successors.

had a spy network that would make the kgb look like basketball players (exhagerration, just incase your dumbass will actually take that seriously) and had over one thousand employees.

None of this just dried up and went away once Capone was convicted. As I said, the Outfit was even larger, more entrenched, and more expansive after Capone.

if this makes you happy. believe it. it doesn't make it true.

The facts make it true, which you obviously are unfamiliar with.

you fvcking idiot. capone was my introduction to the mob dickhead.

Well you obviously didn't read much on him, or really anything past him as far as the Outfit goes.

i know everything there is to know about him. MUCH MORE than you'll ever know about the guy.

Azure9920 wrote:What's with the hostility bro? I was in agreement with you.

Even to a casual bystander who knows nothing of the mafia or its workings, it's painfully obvious John Gotti was one of the most successful NY bosses of all time, I mean, look at all that press he got!

there is a difference between gotti press and capone press. capone got his highlight because he was practically the supreme ruler of the city of chicago. he employed 1000+ people. gotti got his press because he put himself out there like a whore. it wasen't his power that got him fame, it was solely his career and somewhat charisma.

thewestside wrote:I'll say it one more time. If you are going to use the incident of Capone smacking the mayor as the basis for your argument of how powerful he was, at least know what mayor he assaulted. But as usual, the facts escape you.

"i messed up the name chicago from cicero because i read about this incident 2-3 years ago. this PROVES that i have no idea what i'm talking about. i don't know if you actually take a second to read your posts or if you just type and then read when it's posted."

Doesn't mean as much as you think it means. But obviously this is the kind of incident you would base your whole argument on.

you don't know how much it means to me

So did his successors.

accardo and i doubt even nitti in his early years of taking over the outfit controlled as much police as capone.

None of this just dried up and went away once Capone was convicted. As I said, the Outfit was even larger, more entrenched, and more expansive after Capone.

hmmmm no dickhead. when capone went away, so did prohibition. the outfit shrinked in power and size as the big void was left in the middle there.

Well you obviously didn't read much on him, or really anything past him as far as the Outfit goes.

LOL! Yeah, that's why you thought he assaulted the Mayor of Chicago.

i haven't read about capone in 2-3 years and i still remember small facts like his 23 garfield place apartment when he was 12 or 14. or his precise quote on gallucio's sister and many more quotes and specific figures. that should show you how much i've read about him. while you didn't even know he assualted a mayor. you merely googled it when i brought it up and seen it was cicero and not chicago and now think you can come on here trying to act smart. however, it's an act. nothing more as it will never be a reality.

what you're claiming is that after the arrest and conviction of al capone and the end of prohibition. the chicago outfit had no recession. it only grew with no shrinkage in power or wealth or size?

Yes, in fact it actually expanded it's operations. Everyone says it. Read article's on the Outfit's history, read books on the Outfit, not one says that the Outfit didn't aggressively expand their operations in Chicago and control illegal activity throughout the area west of the Mississippi.

Why do you think that Capone ran a more powerful organization than Nitti or Accardo?

i'm not going to say i can find proof on the internet but i'm not going to due to laziness because that won't prove anything here. let's just say, one key reason i think capone controlled more police and politicians is because of prohibition and the corruption that surronded that era. i think we can both agree that every documentary involving prohibition mentions quite thoroughly the corruption that surronded the bootlegging. i mean you have something everybody drinks.

Why do you think that Capone ran a more powerful organization than Nitti or Accardo?

because capone employed thousands of people and i believe capone was more powerful because he controlled beer in the city which was the biggest moneymaker for ioc 'til the drug business kicked in.

CheGuevara wrote:accardo and i doubt even nitti in his early years of taking over the outfit controlled as much police as capone.

Once again you are going off pure assumption. Despite your claims you have obviously done relatively little research on Capone and absolutely no research on the Chicago bosses that succeeded him. Through the decades after Capone was long gone, there were numerous cases involving politicians, judges, cops, etc. on the Outfit's payroll. Ever heard of Operation Greylord or Operation Gambat? What am I saying? Of course you haven't.

hmmmm no dickhead. when capone went away, so did prohibition. the outfit shrinked in power and size as the big void was left in the middle there.

You are talking out of your ass with aboslutely no facts to base them on. The Chicago Outfit, like the rest of the mob, only expanded after Prohibition which simply gave them their base. After Prohibition was repealed the Outfit expanded it's gambling operations from the numbers racket in the black neighborhoods on the south side to the casinos in Vegas and Havana. Then there was their involvement in the union movement, including the Teamsters and the Central States Pension Fund, which was the start up capital for many of the early casinos. Though always more restricted in Chicago, they were also involved in the growing narcotics trade. Prostitution was becoming more passe but they had the strip clubs, massage parlors, porn, etc. The Outfit after Capone also had indirect supervision and represented all the families west of Chicago on the Commission.

i haven't read about capone in 2-3 years and i still remember small facts like his 23 garfield place apartment when he was 12 or 14. or his precise quote on gallucio's sister and many more quotes and specific figures. that should show you how much i've read about him. while you didn't even know he assualted a mayor. you merely googled it when i brought it up and seen it was cicero and not chicago and now think you can come on here trying to act smart. however, it's an act. nothing more as it will never be a reality.

Of course I knew he assaulted the mayor. That is one of the most commonly told stories about Capone. I didn't have to Google anything. It's you who does that asshole. And it was me who had to tell you exactly which mayor he assaulted. It's obvious all you have done is read one or two books on Capone. That's it. You have really no understanding of the organization that preceded him, was under his reign, or what followed. Once again Johnny, you're shown to be the complete ameteur that you are.

thewestside wrote:Once again you are going off pure assumption. Despite your claims you have obviously done relatively little research on Capone and absolutely no research on the Chicago bosses that succeeded him. Through the decades after Capone was long gone, there were numerous cases involving politicians, judges, cops, etc. on the Outfit's payroll. Ever heard of Operation Greylord or Operation Gambat? What am I saying? Of course you haven't.

no i didn't read about it i've read about capone extensively and know more about him than you ever will. i've also read about giancana, nitti and accardo. but that is it as far as the chicago outfit goes. there is nothing you can say that will prove you right. capone has prohibition which made cops and everyone extremely prone to corruption as they had to get their beer from gangsters.

You are talking out of your ass with aboslutely no facts to base them on. The Chicago Outfit, like the rest of the mob, only expanded after Prohibition which simply gave them their base. After Prohibition was repealed the Outfit expanded it's gambling operations from the numbers racket in the black neighborhoods on the south side to the casinos in Vegas and Havana. Then there was their involvement in the union movement, including the Teamsters and the Central States Pension Fund, which was the start up capital for many of the early casinos. Though always more restricted in Chicago, they were also involved in the growing narcotics trade. Prostitution was becoming more passe but they had the strip clubs, massage parlors, porn, etc. The Outfit after Capone also had indirect supervision and represented all the families west of Chicago on the Commission.

dickhead, i'm not talking about 10, 20 years after capone. i'm talking about the first years after capone went away, the organization lost much, much power as both capone and prohibition went away. you can think what you want about the 50s and 60s. i don't care. but not even a person as stupid as you can possibly believe capone and prohibition going away at the same time didn't have a negative effect on the chicago outfit.

AND OF COURSE THEY WILL EXPAND GAMBLING OPERATIONS YOU FVCKING IDIOT! PROHIBITION ENDED! THEY EITHER HAD TO EXPAND OR QUIT BEING GANGSTERS. MY GOD, YOUR IGNORANCE IS SHOCKING!

Of course I knew he assaulted the mayor. That is one of the most commonly told stories about Capone. I didn't have to Google anything. It's you who does that ahole. And it was me who had to tell you exactly which mayor he assaulted. It's obvious all you have done is read one or two books on Capone. That's it. You have really no understanding of the organization that preceded him, was under his reign, or what followed. Once again Johnny, you're shown to be the complete ameteur that you are.

actually, try three. and how many books have you read about him you ignorant dunce? of course, you tell me what i do and don't know as well. because how could i have forgotten, you not only know facts, you also know what people think.

CheGuevara wrote:no i didn't read about it i've read about capone extensively and know more about him than you ever will. i've also read about giancana, nitti and accardo. but that is it as far as the chicago outfit goes. there is nothing you can say that will prove you right. capone has prohibition which made cops and everyone extremely prone to corruption as they had to get their beer from gangsters.

This is actually a good example of your overall problem Johnny. You've read about the Chicago mob during the Capone years. But you've read nothing on it afterwards. So you really have no frame of reference to make comparisons. So you simply have to go on assumptions. It's the same thing you do with Albanian organized crime. You read about it but very little about any other type. So you have no frame of reference to make comparisons and simply have to go on assumptions. This is exactly what gets you in over your head in argument after argument. You come in knowing only part of the story and end up looking ridiculous when you make claims that aren't true.

dickhead, i'm not talking about 10, 20 years after capone. i'm talking about the first years after capone went away, the organization lost much, much power as both capone and prohibition went away. you can think what you want about the 50s and 60s. i don't care. but not even a person as stupid as you can possibly believe capone and prohibition going away at the same time didn't have a negative effect on the chicago outfit.

What is your reasoning for the Outfit losing "much" power after Capone and Prohibition went away? Don't just give us your assumptions. Give us some actual evidence or examples.

actually, try three. and how many books have you read about him you ignorant dunce? of course, you tell me what i do and don't know as well. because how could i have forgotten, you not only know facts, you also know what people think.

To answer this question I had to dig out all of them. Many which I haven't read in some time. I have books that cover Capone directly and ones that cover him indirectly, as they are more about the Outfit in general or his successors. Of the ones that cover him as the main topic, I have four. Of the ones that cover him as part of the more general subject of the Outfit, I have over a dozen.